-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/22/07 20:44, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: > On Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 09:44:36PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > >>> I know. my 486 won't run debian anymore. Not enough ram. Runs great >>> with OBSD. My P-II runs quite slow with Etch (OK with Sarge). Also >>> runs great with OBSD. >> Etch should run great on a P-II, as long as you ditch the heavy-weight >> desktop environments, and keep the number of packets installed under control >> (otherwise apt/dpkg will require too much RAM, and hit swap too heavily). > > Well, it speeded up somewhat by ditching the install-by-default locales > stuff and sticking with 'C'. I use icewm. On Etch, xorg takes a lot > more memory than on OBSD. Enough that with one xterm only, Etch hits > swap and OBSD has 15 MB ram free. I can open Konqueror via ssh and > still not hit swap (unless I open more than 4 tabs). > > So yes, etch is slower and uses more memory than OpenBSD. > > On the other hand, nothing is easier to set up than Debian with > aptitutude. OBSD's packages don't come with startup scripts; you have > to write your own. I've also had some interoperability problems when > sshing from OBSD to Etch. Had to find a common TERM when on VTs > (TERM=screen works), and lately iceweasel doesn't work via ssh from > OBSD. > > Also, as a desktop, OBSD is difficult. > > So its a tradeoff. I haven't decided which way to go for the P-II, but > I'll stick with Etch for my Athlon64 for the multi-media ease.
What's FreeBSD like of small systems? - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFG9dTIS9HxQb37XmcRAh0uAJ48dHP+f+gqUxsfxpGQ2DthmeeQ7wCfaZI+ 9EUU45iDU8+hc5IDA7hPATQ= =isCj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
